Reasons why Pakistan couldn’t have fixed the Oval fiasco
There are a hundreds of reasons why one should not believe that the Pakistan cricket team is in the clear, innocent of fixing the Oval one-dayer against England on Friday. Right now, I can’t think of one. Pakistan cricket team might have proven their worth
as an incompetent batting side, worthless fielding unit and hapless bowling attack but when the going gets tough, the tough gets going. That’s Pakistan cricket team for you.
Fast bowler Umar Gul might not have imagined in his dreams that he would go onto take as many as 6 wickets against England in a one day match that too on the current tour. He may not have been accused of being involved in the spot
fixing saga but the whole cricket team was dealing with the blow ever since it hit them 3 weeks ago.
Like all his team mates, Umar Gul wanted to bow out from the tour without being accused of anything and start afresh against http://www.senore.com/Cricket/South-Africa-c757 next month. But his captain had other ideas. Reports say that Shahid Afridi inducted Abdur
Razzaq into the side in place of the hopeless Mohammad Irfan, against the wishes of Waqar Younis, the coach and one-time team mate of Razzaq. The all rounder proved to be the main difference between the two sides, besides Gul of course and delivered both as
a batsman and a bowler, proving his worth by aiding in the thrilling victory.
So why did the International Cricket Council act as if it has seen a ghost after England lost by 23 runs? It isn’t that the English side was unbeatable or a giant-killing spree, yet the ICC believed every word that came in print
against http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Shahid-Afridi-c2482 and his men, and instead of believing in the Pakistan Cricket Board, blindly followed the tabloids that are known for their notoriety. They might have proof and information that might implicate the Pakistan cricket team but they didn’t
count on one thing that goes in Pakistan’s favour - common sense.
Not even the biggest bookie in the world would be able to fix a match for Pakistan where they emerge victorious. The reason being that it is impossible for a professional bowler to take a wicket at will. He might try to take one
but never be able to take one at will because the batsman has the bat and his legs to defend the ball. Similarly, a batsman might try to hit the ball out of the park every time he faces a delivery but there is no surety that he might succeed in doing so each
and every time. The reason being the bowler and his self respect because after being hit repeatedly he might do something extra, something different, something out of the ordinary. Sadly, the newspaper failed to take that into account and accused http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Delhi-c780 and
Dubai match fixers of fixing what turned out to be a cliff-hanger of a match.
The second reason why Pakistan players would not have fixed the match is that another loss might have cost them a place in the side. All know that the http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Pakistan-c755 Cricket Board would have axed the players who would have failed in
this match, meaning no place in the World Cup squad, and hence losing hefty match fee and monetary gains. They bowled, batted and fielded their hearts out at The Oval and would have won the match easily had they scored 30 more runs. Since they fell short by
30 odd runs, the match remained a thriller till Abdur http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Razzaq-c84421 got rid of James Anderson, the last man to be dismissed.
Finally, the third reason why Shahid Afridi and his men shouldn’t worry about the charges levelled this time after winning the match; The British press claims that Afridi’s bizarre dismissal proved that there was more than meets
the eye. They failed to think that he couldn’t have deflected the ball onto the stumps even if he wanted to. Also, had the ball been deflected and went on for a boundary after the deflection, the fielder would have been blamed for an erratic throw, rather
than the batsman for clumsy running.
Suppose Pakistan had not won the match. What would the British tabloid have done then? No one knows but one might speculate that they might pin the blame of losing on something out of the box - say the floods in Pakistan or even
the lunar eclipse!
Tags: